West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1887-10-27

cal, IL may be pardoncd for the ex.
preston. TO mystify this matter which
is now history, by crying free trade
and horizontal reduction Cor II such
had been the purpose of the Morri-
son bill; II Mr.. Randall and his cor.
poralsguard of Democrats acting with
the Republicans, had the power to
defeat the consideration OF that bill.
they had the power to make II by
amendment just such a measure as
they wanted it to be. But they chose
tn prevent its consideration and
thereby to defeat the reform promised
altogether. In this they were no
doubt inwardly consistent as being
really opposed TO any tariff reform or
reduction-really opposed to carry
ing out the party's pledge to reform
the tariff Sin spirit OF fairness and
reduce the surplus.
Mr.. Randall and the few Demo
Gratis, and the many Republicans
acting with him, are directly respon-
sible to the people for the failure to
adjust, simplify and reduce the tariff,
and per consequence the surplus, as
the party promised to do. Mr.. Ran.
dali is willing TO and will no doubt
aid in reducing the revenue by re-
peeling the tax on liquors and tobac.
co, but are the people, at this time,
willing to do that and pay an exorbi.
tant duty on sugar, rice and all man.
ufactures of steel, iron, wool and cot
ton, and many other articles OF daily
consumT ton n prime necessity? /
remarked above that the charge of
free trade is simply nonsensical
when applied to revenue reforms, and
a moments reflection will convince
anyone open 10 conviction that such
is the fact. Mr.. Carlisle, who is ac-
corded the first place in the revenue
tariff party, not only from his posi-
ton in the congress, but on account
Of his ability and consistency as a
leader, has so frequently and 80 clear.
ly defined his position on the tariff
that it does seem like willful misrep.
resentation to call him free trader.
when coming from Republicans, but
how much more unkind when coming
from Democrats.
1 showed in former communities
ton that Mr.. Randall and Mr.. Car
Isle (they are regarded as the expo
nents OF two different schools of
thought) occupy precisely the same
ground upon the question Of the
amount of money to be raised by a
tariff, and ] defy successful contra
diction of that proposition. All the
protection that is possible through a
tariff, according to both of these gen
tlemen, must be given or produced by
raising a sum Of money, by = tariff,
equal to-not exceeding-the honest
and economical necessities Of the
general government. Yet one is a
protectiOnist and the other = free
trader-a paradOx-an inexplicable
riddle mathematical absurdity.
l propose, with your indulgence in
future article or two to discuss the
principles OF the tariff and its rela-
ton 70 labor. ! shall, in the inves-
tigotion, endeayor to show the neces.
sity for tariff under our system OF
government TO raise the necessary
revenue Tor the support Of the GOV
eminent, and TO show that in raising
the necessary revenues for the sup
port Of the government, protection
and encouragement to home indus
tries must result, and that the only
questions about which Democrats
ought TO divide, and about which they
do in fact differ, are as to details.and
conflicting claims Of the various in
dustries as TO their respective neces-
stiles and exposure to hurtful foreign
competition. I shall maintain that
the Democratic party does not now,
and never did as party, advocate a
system Of protection such ~ is advo-
Gated by Mr. Blaine and his party.
---------
cuiitY 81 muraer.
No..